kancollefandomcom-20200213-history
Talk:World 5/@comment-37955540-20190206044221/@comment-37955540-20190207131750
@103.208.220.147 This is the last response I will make, if you cannot talk sense. Clearly you have not understood my point, as you decide to ignore the question I asked: Would you rather see players discussing how to improve on their fleet comps, or whining about how hard the maps are? The problem is optimal comps cease to be optimal and only the select best few survive the buff. Other people keep telling you same things that lead to anti-progression being the conclusion but you just shrug it off with "what are you people on about it's still doable". You must be joking with me. It is not the case that the majority is always correct. For instance, classic physics was thought to be complete by the majority until discovery of things like quantum physics by a few. If a comp is no longer good after buff, it is just bad for the new map. Forget about it, and move forward. A coin that says win on one side and lose on another. But getting the win side of the coin and people better off pray to RNG that FS protection mechanism doesn't divert their attacks from Wo-KFS to the surviving SWP escort in diamond formation at night because none of their ships can kill the latter, when they previously could. (1) Getting harder encounter does not equal to 0% boss sink rate, you are just wrong mathematically there. (2) SWP can be sunk with normal ships, do your maths there. (3) And you just said the other 50% is doable, so why not just do it? And yet a Kongou fleet with carriers became viable later on with guarantee of less salt, and so is 6-5 south route. Did they get better or worse over time? How 6-5 has changed over time has nothing to do with 5-5. You are comparing apples to oranges. What? Just because you used to make 4 medals per month, it justifies that 1 medal per month should be taken from players with a flip of a switch? Dude, you don't even need to care about BPs running scarce. You've even improved heaviest guns while there are people who still have to chase blueprints and then this happened. What's your argument? That you only had to farm 4 medals per month so people shouldn't cry about it? Go ride a cattle on a highway then since cars didn't exist until late 19th century. I thought I made it clear about how players can play 3-5, old 5-5, and 6-5 better over time but that doesn't matter because poor you only had 4 medals per month when you started. You're willing to overlook the glaring progression bump the devs have (inadvertently) put up just to meet the difficulty criteria in the last event, especially with the fact that they tweeted afterwards that they nerfed the boss comp specifically after they acknowledged (thank god at least) the absurdity of the buff. So you want to get a medal but does not want to use a good comp? And with the flip of a switch 5-5 cannot be cleared? My argument is: people were fine with 4 medals per month, and when they are given more, they complain. Playing some of the maps better is good for us, but it does not mean it must happen to every map. Just like technology improves many aspects of life, there is no law to say it must improve every aspect of life. This is not going from old map to new one. This is the same map since Phase 2 that's jacked up recently just because for some reason the devs decided that the same SWP should appear in the last event. The main issue is that the difficulty as well as the map got out of hand, not players needing easy doggo walk to get what they want. Imagine an MMORPG where an old Lv.30 map that has crucial materials for crafting suddenly jacks up to Lv.60 just for the sake of veterans. That's what happened. Phase 2 is already different from phase 1. Maps with different nodes and encounters can be considered as new maps. By difficulty got out of hand, you mean some comps have difficulty clearing the map. It is completely different from the statement that there is no single comp that can clear the map reliably. Wow, if giving means taking more of your resources to sortie LSC ships in the same map that you're familiar with... Hey, it's taking back while giving more work to do at the same pace as usual. First of all, I spent 12163/7730/13063/480 and 48 buckets this month. That is about the same as phase 1. I spend much less bauxite in phase 2 thanks to Ise k2 and airplane proficiency. If you are spending more, there is probably a problem with your comp. I'm sure that no one laughs monthly when getting medals from these maps. That is because those one who laughs just copy comps from internet. There are two points to argue here. First of all, many of the maps can be cleared with different comps, and I do clear with different comps when I feel like it, or I have to do certain quests. Secondly, if one uses the same comps to clear EOs over time, it just means that he is not adapting to changes. It is like people trying hard with their old comps in new 5-5, and refuse to do anything on their end. Look who doesn't get it? I have never asked for easy shit, not in my state. Don't put that in people's mouths. The devs could've done something like sortieing 4DDs to 5-5 thrice quests or sortieing some bizarre fleet to west route in 4-5, instead of permabuffing SWP herself since updates come monthly. Oh wait. They did, like the new year quests in which you had to sortie DDs to 4-5. I thought that was a good job, in my state that is. They even made World 7 and 7-3 is on the way as we speak. They can do much more for veterans that buffing up the current maps should be the last thing to do, while at the same time showing newer players a more varied ways to catch up in order to withstand the events. So, why did they flip 5-5 upside down and leave it in its sorry state anyway? All I've said again and again is that this buff is anti-retention since it's anti-progression. If you think that going back to 4 medals per month is going to retain players, you lost the plot. Going back to when 5-5 changed itself upon Phase 2, I've never complained about the double Re comp any remotely as much as right now because I could still see a variety of ways to handle it. But then, overnight SWP became a riot bulletproof tank reactive armored sniper on which needs a select few shipgirls in their best health to even stand a chance to avoid inflicting non-scratches. Maybe I should try the CLTs next time. Who knows if the devs intended this. So you enjoy other hard challenges, but not 5-5, good to know. I said 4 of those medals are easy to obtain, it does not mean those are the only medals the newer players can obtain. I started the game without clearing old 5-5 for about half a year, and there was no 4-5. I slowly grind through with 3 medals per month. I was fine there, so why new players cannot be a bit more patient? You said only a select few shipgirls can stand a chance against SWP. Does it mean other ships are completely hopeless? I want to see someone other than myself giving some calculations. And about CLTs? Poor survivability and bad day-time shelling. I will treat that as a joke. If your only solution is Yamasushi and Nelson, then yeah it's perfectly playable for newbies apparently. That is my optimal solution. You clearly cannot read. Yeah just suck it up coz we're bringing CA Hime in boisss. This guy is so high up on his horsie that he fails to see what's below when this buff affects the more positive players as well. Some of the players that you see lamenting are very competent, ya know? If they're complaining now but not before, it's more likely to not be player issue. At least Ekel presents his stance better here. How do you define a competent player? Is a player with good ships and equipment, but brings bad comps to 5-5 considered competent? What does the complains lead you? Do they yield any positive outcomes, such as better comps if they instead writing threads on how to improve their comps? You've just confirmed in my mind that you're only speaking with elitism in mind, rather than for the sake of lifespan of the game itself. Mind you that I have no rants like this for event maps as they get harder over time as they should be, but one of the regular maps that rewards a much needed progression has become much tougher just because a few numbers have changed. Last time Destiny 2 did progression in with EXP throttling, it went so well. Oh wait. It didn't. Now that game is having a retention problem with even hardcore loyalists but that's due to a set of different matters. So do the same thing with this game as well, albeit slowly(?). You are calling other players competent and veterans. Isn't that elitism for you? And how is my mindset of discussing better comps an exhibition of elitism? There are games that make progression towards older goals gradually easier while at the same time adding new things with higher difficulty to achieve, and one of them is an immensely popular F2P, more so than this game. That's the retention model for persistent games. This buff goes against the model and the healthier side of the playerbase is also negatively affected by it. To g''it gud'' isn't just something you should advise anyone in this case when the only way to git gud is made narrow to go through. I've said before: There are many ways to introduce challenges, such as new maps and quests. Hindering player's progress to get existing items isn't one of them. In fact, it's lazy. Ironic that you're talking about players whining when the devs took the laziest way out to buff up a map, just by changing a few numbers on a boss, and they did it horribly.' '(1) There are games that are easier, but it does not mean kancolle needs to be as easy. I guess you completely forget that kancolle is rng-based game, and the way to git gud is to use better comps. If you ignore that fact, and only whine about how how hard the game gets, you will go nowhere. Oh btw, my point in the post is not about getting better at the game, but to suggest that one should look at their problems and seek for improvements before complaning.' '''I am going to end with a question: which one benefits the playerbase more? (1) Whine about how hard the game is (at somewhere the devs do not even look at); (2) discuss how comps can be improved.'